leaflover
Stanley Cup 2022
The owners will LOVE you and anyone else thats willing to shell out premium money to watch an inferior product :lolhunter1909 said:
Why not stop at Mcdonalds and pay $40.00 for a big mac on your way home as well.
- Status
Why not stop at Mcdonalds and pay $40.00 for a big mac on your way home as well.
I refuse to watch the NHL product when it is clearly not the best. Call them the Toronto tuba's of the Western World hockey league and i may pay 15 dollars to see it. I will not pay 60 bucks plus to watch the NHL without all the NHL talent.Carl Spackler said:
garry1221 said:
What is it you think supply and demand is? Yes bad teams, generally get lower demand for tickets. Fans seem to thikn a market is bad if they dont sell out when their team is in last place, but that is a romantic notion in all but a few markets in certain situations, not reality. On the other hand, you are suggeting that if all teams had the same payroll, that attendance would be higher for the teams not making the playoffs. Perhaps thinking the fans will be fooled?
This is the part I'm confused about. Why do people think ticket prices will remain the same if replacement players are used? What NHL owner thinks that he can charge NHL prices with non-NHL caliber talent? He can try it, but he'll be in for a rude awakening. I might be in the minority, but if replacement players are used, I fully expect ticket prices to be lowered (no different than when the Binghampton Senators play the occasional game at the Corel Centre).SwisshockeyAcademy said:
But back to the title of the thread...I agree, you can stick a fork in it now. There won't be a season this year. Neither side is going to budge...what a frickin' waste. Now if I can only find a way to get SporstNet to show B-Sens games on TV...
garry1221
Registered User
thinkwild said:
I'm not saying that at all. Those would be your suggestions trying to be planted in my head. Everyone says ticket prices are so high because of the demand. Yet No one wants to put a cap on salaries because they say the demand will still be there for the tickets, thus keeping ticket prices high. However if a cap makes a team mediocre at best, then how, as a fan, could you justify paying allstar type ticket prices. Hockey fans are not drones(well i suppose there's a few). The majority of the fans would refuse to pay those prices for such a 'mediocre' product. Sure there may be a few people out there stupid enough to pay it, but if thre's an overwhelming majority that don't then you're left with empty seats, less revenue, less money. What would you do as an owner, simply sit back and watch an empty arena? NO, you lower ticket prices and bring the fans back to the arena.
To put it in simple terms: You wouldn't think of paying Starbucks prices when buying a cup of coffee from Caribou coffee right? So why pay first class prices for a second class seat. Yes i know there's two different examples there, but both are valid.
BlackRedGold said:
And name 1 guy who scored 60 goals last year or 1 guy who had 140 points. You can't.
Face it. The system is broke and there's no billion dollar TV deals out there to justify saving this season or next.
chara said:
What are you babbling about now?
Are you even trying to make sense? Or are you just rambling on for no apparent reason?
BlackRedGold said:
Guess what? Either way you spin it, it still ends up as:
If salaries don't increase, neither will ticket prices.
No, most fans don't want the MLB. Most fans want a healthy successful league.
And if you were smart enough to understand some basic economics, you would realize the league is in trouble, and would want the NHL to fix it, and if it meant that there was no NHL hockey, it would be worth it.
dawgbone said:
Completely faulty logic.
If A then B does not equal if B then A.
If ticket prices don't increase then salaries won't increase is a statement that is true but your statement isn't.
Especially if the owners get their salary cap. Salaries won't be able to go up but there will be nothing stopping ticket prices from going up other then consumer demand.
The NHL is the NHL. MLB is MLB. They are two distinct and unique organizations. The only common thread is that they are both sports organizations and neither one has a salary cap. The rest of their CBA's are very different. The spread between the rich and poor is different. The age of unrestricted free agency is different. Their arbitration systems are very different.
Well, I am smart enough to understand some basic economics. Actually, I am even smart enough to understand some more advanced economics and I have the degree to prove it!
The question is do you understand basic economics?
Why is the league in trouble? What is going to happen if the status quo isn't maintained? What can be worse then no hockey, which is the current situation?
BlackRedGold said:
Not necessarily. In some NHL markets, it is the demand. They will jack prices as high up as possible, as long as people pay it. In most NHL markets, prices are up because they need to be in order to maxmize revenues.
In Toronto, you can have an average ticket price of $150... it doesn't matter, someone will pay it. That isn't the case in all cities, otherwise, ticket prices would have been sky high Long before the meteoric rise in player salaries.
In certain markets... which is what you are failing to grasp. In alot of NHL cities, ticket prices are as high as consumer demand allows, and it still isn't enough! These cities aren't the norm, they are the exception.
And neither league is very good. Yes they are distinct, but they have very close similarities. The MLB is just a few years ahead of where the NHL is, in terms of disparity between the haves and the have nots.
The spread between the rich and poor isn't that different (outside of the expos, who are now gone), the only difference in baseball is that the numbers on both sides are bigger.
Neither system is good if you aren't a top revenue generating team.
The Senators are nothing more than the Oakland A's... continually trading off better players and hoping it works out... I wonder where the Sens will be in a couple of seasons.
Congrats... you can say you have a degree on a message board... I guess we should all abandon ship because you say you have a degree, which means you are all-knowing.
I do understand basic economics... I understand that once you maximize revenues, continual increases in your costs are not maintainable. I also know that salaries league-wide aren't getting smaller, they are getting much bigger.
I also understand that if this is happening, and you own a franchise that is suffering through this, you are in trouble.
The league is in trouble because the salaries are out of control. What's going happen? It's certainly not going to get better on it's own, simply based on the fact it's gotten worse.
What can be worse than no hockey?
Lots. Like your favorite team no longer in your city, or watching your best players continually leaving to rich teams because they can spend $80mil on salaries. You're just pissed because you think your team has a chance at the cup right now, and this could be your season... I understand that. However, you aren't thinking about the future of your team. What's going to happen in 3-4 years when your best players command significantly more money than what they get now? What happens if your team misses out on 4 or 5 cups in the future because they didn't make a stand now to change the league economics?
I would figure as a Senator fan, you would be pleased. Being able to keep a team with Spezza, Hossa, Havlat, Chara, Redden etc... for 7 or 8 years would be very appealing to me. At the same time, watching salaries increase season after season like they have been would have me worried out of my mind.
It's a gate-driven league. Seasons ticket holders everywhere (who are the bread and butter of the league) support the owners... if I'm an owner, I care more about the majority of their opinions than I do about someone who doesn't own seasons tickets.
BlackRedGold said:
Except that a salary cap comes as a percentage of revenue and, in a gate-driven league, you'll have a hard time getting ticket sales out of that equation. Thus, the more tickets that are sold at a higher price, then the higher the cap will be, and the more money available for player contracts. So, increasing consumer demand would be linked directly with player salaries.
Jag68Sid87
Sullivan gots to go!
dawgbone said:
Actually in all NHL markets tickets are priced to maximize revenues based upon demand.
Well then those cities shouldn't have NHL teams if they're not willing to pay NHL prices. Why should the fans in cities that are willing to pay NHL prices suffer a lockout because fans in other cities are too cheap to pay NHL prices?
Neither league is very good? That's rather subjective. I didn't see a whole lot of Flames or Lightning fans complaining about the league during the playoffs last year.
What is the spread in both leagues? Why do you think that it isn't that different? I don't follow baseball that closely anymore but don't the Yankees have a payroll close to $200M? There's no one even close to that in the NHL.
The difference is that the top revenue generating teams in baseball are in the biggest markets. In the NHL , for the most part, they aren't. In the NHL the top revenue generating teams are the ones that are successful, not the ones in the big markets.
When have the Senators traded off any better players?
The Sens will probably be right were they were the past off-season, Stanley Cup contenders, in a couple of seasons.
How much bigger are they getting? If you're going to make a claim at least quantify it! How much are salaries rising in the NHL?
I thought I prefaced my previous post with the fact that I don't have a financial interest in the NHL. So why do I care about this?
Once again, define how salaries are going out of control. How much did salaries rise last season over the previous?
You've had those players in your organization for over a decade. Why shouldn't they have the right to go somewhere else if they choose? Why should they be stuck in a losing organization for their entire career?
Hopefully the revenues will be there with a Cup or two to pay them. There is a chance that can happen. But how can the Sens keep all those good players if there is a cap? Then they have to lose someone.
If the best players are going to command more money the Sens can pay those players with the money from my really expensive playoff tickets. With a cap they can't use the money I spent on playoff tickets to sign them. They'll have to trade some of them off.
I think they're more likely to lose out with a cap. Especially if the age of UFA is lowered.
How much have salaries been increasing season after season? You keep bringing that up but you never specify how much.
Well, I'm a season ticket holder. Although the longer this drags on, the more likely it is that that will change permanently.
BlackRedGold said:
This seems to be a favourite phrase for some around here.
I gotta ask, in your expert opinion, what do you consider NHL prices?
dawgbone said:
Nothing can be worse than no hockey. If my LA Kings left Los Angeles, it would suck @$$, but I'd rather have hockey than to not have hockey at all. I for one am grateful that we get to watch hockey on T.V. every day. (when it was around.)
Careful now , there is a colorful poster here who has a degree. He understands more than just basic economics. They took him off the caramilk secret case to educate the uneducated on why they are all moron player bashers.Its working wonders.Cully9 said:
BlackRedGold said:
So then why haven't the ticket prices been sky high for the past 10 years? Why do they grow at a higher rate than inflation? Why are they growing at a higher rate than attendance growth?
What exactly are NHL prices?
Ottawa is the lower half of the league as well, and they complain about the league economics and prices as much as anyone.
I guess they shouldn't have a team either.
But this figures I guess.. 2 years ago when Bryden had the city by the short curlies, Sens fans everywhere where at a loss... but now with a stable owner who is willing to put up with some losses, Sens fans can join the leafs up on their perch like 2 grumpy grandfathers yelling at the kids who don't have as much money as them.
No, but Sens fans sure complained alot... so did every other teams fans who weren't in the finals. And as much as the complaining stopped in Calgary during their run, it started back up once the aura of what happened started to rub off.
And I said within each sport, the spread isn't different, it's just the haves in baseball have a lot more than the haves in hockey, and the have-nots in baseball have a lot more than the have-nots in hockey.
Sorry man... the top revenue generating teams in the NHL are as follows:
New York Rangers
Dallas Stars
Toronto Maple Leafs
Philadelphia Flyers
Detroit Red Wings
Colorado Avalanche
Boston Bruins
Chicago Blackhawks
Los Angeles Kings
Montreal Canadiens
Minnesota Wild
New York Islanders
St Louis Blues
New Jersey Devils
Columbus Blue Jackets
San Jose Sharks
Tampa Bay Lightning
Washington Capitals
Oddly enough, they are some of the bigger markets, and more successful teams... gee, who would have guessed?
It started with Yashin, then Bonk. Like I've said to you countless times, wait until the contracts for guys like Hossa, Havlat, Spezza, etc... come up for renewal. You haven't seen it yet, but the market for those guys is far more than what the Senators can pay. Try using a little bit of forsight. You are evidently an economics whiz... NHL salaries have gone up every year, and they'll keep going up.
Contenders? Maybe... depends on how much coin Hossa wants. If you think he'll still only be looking for $3.5 mil after a couple more 40 goal seasons, you are dreaming. Guys like him, Spezza, Havlat, Redden and maybe even Chara are going to be up for some pretty big money... I wonder what you will say then. What'll happen when Muckler has to trade UFA to be Chara in a couple of years? Hope you get a good young decent return like you got for Yashin and start over. Your team is on the cusp... but your players are also on the cusp... they are just hovering into that elite player category.
Not everyone is Alfredsson who signs for less money than he could get elsewhere.
1997-98 was when the NHL average salary topped $1mil for the first time. In 2000-01 the average NHL salary was $1.48mil. At the end of the 2003-04 season, that was up to $1.83 mil.
Are you not a fan? You should be concerned about how the owner of your franchise feels.
Because most players don't start to make serious strides in the NHL for 5 or 6 years after they are drafted, then they start to play well, establish themselves, the team starts to win, and BAM, contract time and so long to the player you just spent 6 or 7 years developing.
Do you think players on the 97 or 98 Oilers team were sick of losing? They were a young team with some good players who beat some pretty good teams in the playoffs. You think they left because they were sick of losing?
No they won't, because 30 other teams will be in the same situation as them. Hossa won't be able to look for $6mil from other teams, because guys like Palffy, Demitra, etc... will also be looking.
If there is a cap, it changes the dynamic of everything... comparables get thrown out the window. instead of Chara looking for Neidermayer money ($7+mil), or Pronger money ($10+mil), he won't be able to get much more than the $5 mil he nearly already makes.
They can't use the money you spent on playoff tickets to keep up as it is. Otherwise, they wouldn't have dealt Bonk. He's depth a team like Ottawa needs to make it farther in the playoffs.
Don't you see? Any player you cast off some team will pick up and they will be better for it. Your playoff revenues over the past few seasons hasn't done much to help you keep a guy like Bonk, or Arvedsson... guys who aren't flashy, but who are still contributors.
It starts off with those guys, but there aren't enough of those guys to cast off to keep up with rising salaries. Soon it isn't the 2nd line centre, it's the 1st.
How? If everyteam is under the same restrictions, how is it Ottawa loses out?
Because it's common knowledge.
And guess what?
You are in the minority of seasons ticket holders.
TiesAreLikeWins 2 Us said:
Well, from my POV, if the Oilers left Edmonton, there would be no NHL hockey to watch.
There is all kinds of good hockey around me, so I guess I can get my fix elsewhere.
Lots of emotion out here today boys...glad to see we all still care...
I don't think ther will be a season this year unless the PA puts its tail between its legs and comes crawling back to the bargining table begging to do whatever is necessary, NOT WHAT THEY FELL IS NECESSARY, to get a season going..
Every time another player opens his mouth we are treated to a delightful monolouge of idiocy...
Do the players not understand that no one feels sorry for them.. that no one cares about them.. we fans care about hockey.. no NHL ok that sucks but i guess I'll go watch the Hamilton Bulldogs next weekend and get a hockey fix... Will it be as good?? does that realy matter?... its hockey I love.. Not... any one player and frankly the longer this lockout goes the more i realize I can live without it.. i also realize that the longer this childish fight over who's is bigger, betman's or goodnowe's the more I find the whole thing disgusting and the longer it will take me to come back,....to NHL hockey
Has anyone else noticed that while the players are calling betman a madman and clamouring to get back to the table that the owners are strangely silent.. kinda like the cat who already new they where going to try and break the union and use replacement players tee-hee
I don't think ther will be a season this year unless the PA puts its tail between its legs and comes crawling back to the bargining table begging to do whatever is necessary, NOT WHAT THEY FELL IS NECESSARY, to get a season going..
Every time another player opens his mouth we are treated to a delightful monolouge of idiocy...
Do the players not understand that no one feels sorry for them.. that no one cares about them.. we fans care about hockey.. no NHL ok that sucks but i guess I'll go watch the Hamilton Bulldogs next weekend and get a hockey fix... Will it be as good?? does that realy matter?... its hockey I love.. Not... any one player and frankly the longer this lockout goes the more i realize I can live without it.. i also realize that the longer this childish fight over who's is bigger, betman's or goodnowe's the more I find the whole thing disgusting and the longer it will take me to come back,....to NHL hockey
Has anyone else noticed that while the players are calling betman a madman and clamouring to get back to the table that the owners are strangely silent.. kinda like the cat who already new they where going to try and break the union and use replacement players tee-hee
dawgbone said:
IMO the NHL Hockey is the best hockey around, and I'd still watch regardless if my team left my area.
MarkZackKarl
Registered User
New York Rangers
Dallas Stars
Toronto Maple Leafs
Philadelphia Flyers
Detroit Red Wings
Colorado Avalanche
Boston Bruins
Chicago Blackhawks
Los Angeles Kings
Montreal Canadiens
Minnesota Wild
New York Islanders
St Louis Blues
New Jersey Devils
Columbus Blue Jackets
San Jose Sharks
Tampa Bay Lightning
Washington Capitals
Ottawa was in better financial shape than Washington San Jose Columbus New Jersey St. Louis Islanders the Kings, Canadiens, Blackhawks, Bruins Stars and Rangers last season.
Dallas Stars
Toronto Maple Leafs
Philadelphia Flyers
Detroit Red Wings
Colorado Avalanche
Boston Bruins
Chicago Blackhawks
Los Angeles Kings
Montreal Canadiens
Minnesota Wild
New York Islanders
St Louis Blues
New Jersey Devils
Columbus Blue Jackets
San Jose Sharks
Tampa Bay Lightning
Washington Capitals
Ottawa was in better financial shape than Washington San Jose Columbus New Jersey St. Louis Islanders the Kings, Canadiens, Blackhawks, Bruins Stars and Rangers last season.
Carl Spackler said:
First any fan of the habs or the Canucks will not see hockey in there cities if replacements are used. Second replacement players can only be used in other Canadian cities on a temporary basis, one season max. Three impasse is extremely tough in a lockout situation and likely not going to be granted, it is not a reward to employers that refuse to negotiate. The owners are playing a very dangerous game and very likely under current labor law in the US and Canada, to lose badly.
dawgbone said:
Sorry, but the 2 top sports economists in the world, Reis and Zimbalist, disagree with you. They also agree that the NHL is not in the finanacial mess that Bettman is singing. I suggest you do a little research on terms such as corporate nepotism and corproate balancing. Bill Daly admitted on ESPN radio that there are teams in the league that are intentionally losing money. Do you really beleive that the Flyers and Rangers are the biggest money losers in the NHL, the teams in the 2 largest sports markets in North America.
Sorry man... the top revenue generating teams in the NHL are as follows:
New York Rangers
Dallas Stars
Toronto Maple Leafs
Philadelphia Flyers
Detroit Red Wings
Colorado Avalanche
Boston Bruins
Chicago Blackhawks
Los Angeles Kings
Montreal Canadiens
Minnesota Wild
New York Islanders
St Louis Blues
New Jersey Devils
Columbus Blue Jackets
San Jose Sharks
Tampa Bay Lightning
Washington Capitals
Sorry according to ESPN radio NY the Rangers are the biggest money loser in the NHL according to there URO, A story in the Philidelpia Enquirer, called Truth in the NHL as thin as ice, list Philidelphia in the list of 6 biggest money losers, however there GM admits to 2 sets of books. What no one understands is the URO's do NOT follow any standard accounting procedures, they are a contrived list of percentages derived from a half baked list of what is supposed to be "hockey related revenue".
New York Rangers
Dallas Stars
Toronto Maple Leafs
Philadelphia Flyers
Detroit Red Wings
Colorado Avalanche
Boston Bruins
Chicago Blackhawks
Los Angeles Kings
Montreal Canadiens
Minnesota Wild
New York Islanders
St Louis Blues
New Jersey Devils
Columbus Blue Jackets
San Jose Sharks
Tampa Bay Lightning
Washington Capitals
Sorry according to ESPN radio NY the Rangers are the biggest money loser in the NHL according to there URO, A story in the Philidelpia Enquirer, called Truth in the NHL as thin as ice, list Philidelphia in the list of 6 biggest money losers, however there GM admits to 2 sets of books. What no one understands is the URO's do NOT follow any standard accounting procedures, they are a contrived list of percentages derived from a half baked list of what is supposed to be "hockey related revenue".
SuperUnknown
Registered User
vanlady said:
That's not true apparantly. It seems that the PA isn't recognized in Quebec or BC as a labour union. As such, they aren't protected by the law (and the teams can use replacement players). Bring em on!
Heck, even if they can't have teams in Montreal and Vancouver, bring on the replacement players, I'll watch the games!
- Status
Ad
Latest posts
-
-
GDT: Leafs @ Lightning 7 PM - the Grand Finale, 70 or bust.- Latest: Eternal Leaf
-
Upcoming events
-
-
2024 SoFi NBA Play-In Tournament Atlanta Hawks @ Chicago BullsWagers: 2Staked: $75.00Event closes- Updated:
-
Edmonton Oilers @ ̷A̷r̷i̷z̷o̷n̷a̷ (Utah) Coyotes - FINAL NHL GAME in Arizona for a long timeWagers: 9Staked: $10,670.00Event closes
- Updated: